Smt. Nancy And ORS. v. Shri Innasi

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** CO/22/2024 Smti. Nancy and Others Vs.

Shri Innasi Mrs. Anjili Nag .... for the petitioners Mr. Rakesh Kumar ... for the respondent September 24, 2024 [SR] Item No.9 The grievance of the petitioner is directed against an order dated 25th January, 2024 passed in a suit for specific performance of a contract.

Briefly, the petitioner challenges an order passed in an application under Order VI rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking amendment to the schedule of the plaint. By the impugned order, the application of the petitioner has been rejected inter-alia on the ground that permitting any such amendment would be akin to "the court being invited to perform an operation over a dead person to get the dead person alive".

It is submitted on behalf of the respondent that no opportunity to oppose the application was afforded by the Trial Court in rejecting the application for amendment. The proposed amendments seek to amend the suit premises in view of the sub-division and re-numbering of the suit premises subsequent to the filing of the suit.

The prayer of the petitioner for making necessary amendments to the schedule of the plaint has been rejected on the ground that such prayer could not have been made in an application under

Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. In passing the impugned order, the Court has failed to discuss the proposed amendments and the consequences of allowing or disallowing the same. There is simply no discussion on the merits or effect of the proposed amendment in the impugned order.

Prima facie, such a prayer may be the subject matter in an application under Order VI Rule 17. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned order dated 25th January, 2024 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Trial Court to rehear the application filed under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 after giving an opportunity to the respondent. It is made clear that there has been no adjudication insofar as the merits of the application for amendment are concerned and the Trial Court is at liberty to dispose of the same in accordance with law without being influenced by any observation on the merits of the amendment application.

With the above directions, CO/22/2024 stands disposed of. ( Ravi Krishan Kapur, J. )